4 ms·
I wonder why none of the usual APT analysis groups are publishing reports on the various hacks. It is obvious that many of the "Anonymous" hacks are just a cove
by melony 5y ago
I wonder why none of the usual APT analysis groups are publishing reports on the various hacks. It is obvious that many of the "Anonymous" hacks are just a cover for state level or state-backed actors. The sheer scale and quantity of Russian organisations being compromised is simply too big to be attributed to global hacktivists alone. If you actually examine the list of organisations that have been compromised in the last few months, many of the data exfiltration attempts are implausible without the use of zero days and compromised employees. I wish Krebs and the others would do an in-depth study and attribution report. It does not serve the information security field well to turn a blind eye just because the targets are unpopular.
- petre 5y ago> "Anonymous" hacks are just a cover for state level or state-backed actors Not sure about that. Most of the recent ones against Russia seemed fun level hacks like defacing official websites. State level actor hacks usually incapacitate infrastructure like the alleged Russian attack on Viasat that screwed up Enercon wind farms or the Israeli attack on Iranian uranium gas centrifuges. https://www.theverge.com/2022/3/25/22996187/russian-military-hack-viasat-internet-satellite-ukraine https://www.theverge.com/2022/3/25/22996187/russian-military... This data theft is a bit different. Central bank transaction intel could be very useful for future sanctions.
- yucky 5y ago>It is obvious that many of the "Anonymous" hacks are just a cover for state level or state-backed actors. This has always been the case though. Not just Anonymous either, look at many of the massive leaks like Panama/Pandora which were almost devoid of US-based people, making it obvious that US Intelligence was likely behind the leaks.